Virtual sports betting in New Zealand: what it really costs the punter

Updated October 2026

Licensed

Available in US

Fast payouts

18+ Only

*Current as of October 30, 2026 · licence status checked against the Racing Industry Act 2020 (section 74AAA, in force 28 June 2025).*

The honest framing for this subject starts in an unlikely place — a statute that has nothing to do with virtual football on its face. Since 28 June 2025, only the two online brands of TAB New Zealand may take a sports or racing bet from a person in New Zealand, under section 74AAA of the Racing Industry Act 2020. That same year the Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 went further and counted betting on a computer-simulated sporting event as online casino gambling, a category TAB NZ did not previously run. The result is a market unlike any other common jurisdiction: a single lawful sports-betting counter, a separate casino regime now catching virtual sport in its net, and a long list of overseas brands that turn up in a search but hold no New Zealand licence. This page is written for the punter who wants to know what that arrangement costs — in turn-of-pocket terms, in edge held by the bookmaker, and in the tools left on the table when only one operator serves the market.

Cost, not tips: why the strategy section opens this page

The cover image slots look ordinary from the outside. A blank paper betting slip on a wooden counter is the kind of stock image a writer reaches for when nothing specific is at hand. Here it is specific: it names the only counter the law currently allows. Since an amendment to the Racing Industry Act 2020 took effect on 28 June 2025, TAB NZ and its online sister brand Betcha are the only operators allowed to take online sports and racing bets in New Zealand. Every strategy tip, every prediction system and every “best odds” comparison that crosses a New Zealand reader’s screen runs against this fact first.

That is why strategy sits ahead of legality on this page. A punter reading about how to predict the outcome of a virtual football fixture is reading about a product the law places inside a casino regime before it reaches them. The system behind the prediction matters once the bookmaker selling it is settled. The cost of clearing an offer, the edge inside the price and the constraint the law puts on which counter takes the bet are the page’s three fixed points, and the strategies, the bet types and the ranked comparison fill in the detail around them.

How prediction systems treat simulated fixtures

What “virtual” actually means at the counter

A virtual sports fixture is a computer-generated event: a randomised draw of outcomes on top of a visualised match or race, settled by software rather than by anything that happened on a pitch. The product exists because real fixtures leave long quiet hours in a sportsbook, particularly overnight in any time zone, and a computer can produce a result every few minutes. The shapes are familiar: virtual football, virtual horse racing, virtual greyhounds, virtual basketball, virtual motorsport. The settlement is RNG-driven, audited by an independent testing house, and instant.

The thing that distinguishes virtual from real sport for the punter is statistical. With real fixtures, the inputs to a model are rich: form, line-ups, conditions, head-to-head history. With virtual fixtures the inputs are sparse — the published return-to-player percentage, the volatility tier, sometimes the size of the fixture pool. Books that promise a “predictable virtual football system” are selling a fog; randomness inside a fixed RTP is not something a published system can move.

System sellers versus the bettor’s edge

The search terms that surround this subject — “free virtual football betting system”, “how to predict virtual football betting”, “virtual basketball betting strategy”, “virtual betting strategy” — share a single assumption: that a method exists which moves the bettor’s expected return above the published RTP. Under formal probability, it does not. A virtual football league with, say, 16 teams and a stated 95% return is a sequence of independent draws from a fixed distribution; no analysis of past draws changes the next one.

What does shift the cost a punter pays is the choice of market and the choice of operator, and that is what the rest of this page is built around. Punters who arrive looking for a system are better served by understanding the published RTP of each market, the margin the operator holds, and the small handful of products — like TAB NZ’s safer-gambling tools — that genuinely change the economics of a session.

Bankroll framing on a fixed-RTP product

Bankroll on virtual sport is the same problem as bankroll on slots, presented in sports clothing. Variance over a short session is high; the long-run return converges on the published RTP only across thousands of bets. A punter who treats a virtual fixture like a real match — staking a meaningful share of a session bank on one “strong-looking” outcome — is betting against variance they have not sized for. Sizing each wager so a long losing streak does not breach a session limit is the entire discipline; nothing published as a “system” replaces it.

Where prediction talk breaks against New Zealand law

Any prediction system offered commercially to New Zealand residents crosses a separate line. The Department of Internal Affairs reads section 74AAA as covering anyone who promotes or takes such bets on behalf of another operator; how the Department treats betting-tip affiliates is not settled in writing. Punters using free or paid tip services tied to an offshore bookmaker should treat that uncertainty as part of the cost.

Bet types, odds and what settling actually pays

What you can bet on in the virtuals section

Virtual sportsbooks replicate the menu of real sports: win/draw/loss on a virtual football match, win/place on a virtual horse race, head-to-head on a virtual basketball game, and over/under on virtual totals. The product looks like sport because the visual on screen is a match. It settles as a fixed-odds bet with an instant result; the betslip behaves like any other fixed-odds wager — stake multiplied by decimal odds, paid on settlement, void rules following the operator’s house rules.

For New Zealand readers, that menu arrives under a casino regime rather than a sports regime. The Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 counts a bet on a computer-simulated sporting event as online casino gambling, which means the safer-gambling tools — deposit limits, time-outs, self-exclusion — that sit on a TAB NZ sportsbook today belong, on a virtual product, to the casino framework. Practically, the punter’s experience at the betslip looks the same. The framework behind it does not.

Decimal odds and what they say on virtual markets

New Zealand books price in decimals by default: a $10 stake at 1.90 returns $19 — the $10 stake plus $9 of profit. Decimal odds move inversely to implied probability: 2.00 implies a 50% chance, 1.50 implies 67%, 3.00 implies 33%. The full price list on a virtual fixture mirrors the price list on a real one; the simulated event does not lower or raise the price.

Tote and pool products — the dividend-based racing wagers TAB NZ has historically run — do not surface on a virtual fixture in the same shape, because virtual racing settles as fixed odds rather than as a parimutuel pool. A punter looking for a dividend on a virtual horse race is looking for a product the structure does not offer.

Same-game multis and accumulators across simulated legs

Combination bets multiply the price across legs: a two-leg multi at 1.90 and 2.20 settles at 4.18; a stake of $10 returns $41.80. On virtual fixtures the legs are independent draws from their fixed distributions, so the long-run return on a multi is the product of the per-leg RTPs. A two-leg multi built from 95% RTP markets returns roughly 90.25% in expectation — already lower than either leg alone, before any margin the bookmaker adds on top. More legs mean more compounding edge for the book.

Void rules vary. Some operators void an entire betslip if one leg is voided; some settle at reduced price using the remaining legs. The punter’s defence is to read the specific operator’s terms before placing a multi with cashback or accumulator insurance attached.

What “best odds” really buys on virtual markets

The phrase “best odds” on virtual markets is doing more work than it can carry. Two operators offering the same virtual football match at 1.85 versus 1.90 are both selling the same RNG distribution, and the difference is the bookmaker’s margin. A market priced at 1.85/1.85 on a two-way fixture carries roughly 8.1% margin in the price; the same fixture at 1.90/1.90 carries roughly 5.3% margin. The punter’s expected loss per $10 wagered drops from about $0.81 to about $0.53. The “best odds” trade is a margin trade; the marketing copy hides that.

The TAB NZ-Betcha duopoly: how New Zealand’s licensed market actually ranks

The country’s two lawful counters

TAB and Betcha are the two online brands of TAB New Zealand — the same operator, not two competitors. The relationship between them is structural: Entain runs the TAB business under a 25-year agreement signed in 2023 that gives Entain a 50/50 share of gross profits, with at least $150m a year going to TAB NZ for the first five years, and Entain pledged a one-off $100m payment to the racing sector. The duopoly is a single counter wearing two signs.

For a punter, what that means in 2026 is twofold. First, you cannot route your play to whichever of the two brands offers the better price on a given fixture, because the two brands use the same back-end pricing; the difference is in product, not price. Second, both brands sit under the same harm-minimisation framework, the same age verification (18+ for betting, with photo ID and a New Zealand address), and the same set of safer-gambling tools.

How New Zealand status shapes the ranking

Once TAB and Betcha take their places at the top of the table, every other reviewed brand runs under a different rule. Each is overseas, holds no licence that authorises taking bets from a person in New Zealand, and offers no path through New Zealand’s complaints framework if a dispute arises. The Department of Internal Affairs has warned that overseas operators may be in jurisdictions with minimal consumer safeguards, may not return unspent credits and may not pay out large wins.

That warning is not a marginal point. It is the single biggest difference between any TAB NZ brand and every brand below it in the comparison, and it precedes every column the table can show.

A landscape view of what is on offer

The spread looks lopsided on purpose. Two entries carry the full set of regulatory and consumer protections the New Zealand framework offers; the other eight carry none of them. That lopsidedness is the answer to most of the “which bookmaker” questions a punter will bring to this page.

Where the operator field starts to diverge

Within the offshore set, the differences are product differences, not regulatory differences. Spinbara runs a separate casino welcome alongside a sports welcome. Rooster.bet and RoyalistPlay share an owner and the same Tobique licence, so any side-by-side of them is effectively a side-by-side of one operator’s two skins. Alawin and RTbet both publish cash-out terms that fix the moment the feature is accepted and decline to guarantee it; BillyBets publishes a coin-shop and an accumulator-insurance-style cashback that no other entry in this set mentions.

None of those differences reach into New Zealand law. They tell a punter who is *already* betting offshore what each shop’s own menu looks like; they do not convert an offshore shop into a New Zealand-licensed shop.

What the law actually says in 2026

The single-counter rule

Section 74AAA of the Racing Industry Act 2020 — inserted by the Racing Industry Amendment Act 2025 and in force from 28 June 2025 — says no person other than TAB NZ may offer racing betting, sports betting or other racing or sports betting to a person in New Zealand, regardless of where that person is resident or incorporated. The Department of Internal Affairs told unlicensed providers serving New Zealand to withdraw with immediate effect. There is no licence route to apply for and no licence register for bookmakers, because there is only this one lawful provider.

The law does not geo-block offshore websites. It puts liability on the offshore operator. A punter in New Zealand accessing an offshore bookmaker is not, on the published record, subject to a criminal penalty: section 19(4) of the Gambling Act 2003 (inserted in 2025) says an individual cannot be convicted for placing a bet with an offshore betting operator in breach of section 74AAA. The Department of Internal Affairs has not announced a penalty for a player. The honest framing the punter needs: New Zealand law targets the operator, the regulator warns players of the risks, and no published penalty for the player was found.

Where virtual sport lands in this framework

The Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 draws a separate line. It licenses online casino gambling and counts betting on a computer-simulated sporting event as online casino gambling. The law does not extend TAB NZ’s sports-betting monopoly. It does mean that, for tax and licensing purposes, a virtual football bet placed with a brand holding the new casino licence sits inside a casino regime rather than a sports regime. Whether TAB NZ’s own virtual products (if any are offered) are treated differently is not established in writing.

Greyhound racing is closing in stages from 1 August 2026, and from that date offshore operators may not take bets on greyhound races either — the prohibition extends with the code.

The taxes and levies built into the price

Recreational gambling winnings are generally not taxable for New Zealand players, and prize money from TAB horse, dog and trotting races is not taxable in the player’s hands. Inland Revenue draws the line at a person who bets as a business, which is a different case. On the operator side, TAB NZ pays the Problem Gambling Levy of 0.74% of its gross profit (in force from 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2028); overseas operators supplying New Zealand residents pay online gambling duty of 12% of profits since 1 July 2024, rising to 16% from 1 January 2027 — but a duty being payable does not make an offer lawful in New Zealand, and the point-of-consumption charge on offshore racing and sports bets ceased on 30 June 2026.

Advertising and what the regulator says about it

Because only TAB NZ may offer betting in New Zealand, the Department of Internal Affairs reads the prohibition as covering promotion or taking of such bets on behalf of another operator. How the Department treats betting-tip affiliates is not established. The Advertising Standards Authority’s Gambling Advertising Code applies to betting advertisements in New Zealand: ads must not target children (under 14) or young people (14 to under 18), judged by context, appeal and expected audience (25% or more of the audience counts as significant where accurate data exists), must not encourage harm, and must be truthful with terms available. No New Zealand equivalent of a whistle-to-whistle broadcast ban was found.

How to keep the session inside the budget

The tools TAB NZ actually provides

The TAB and Betcha apps list the safer-gambling tools that belong to the New Zealand framework: deposit limits, time-outs and self-exclusion. A self-exclusion applies across both brands because both are operated by TAB NZ. TAB NZ also lists the free Gambling Helpline (0800 654 655) and the text line (8006), both maintained by Safer Gambling Aotearoa. These tools are not optional; the New Zealand framework expects operators to keep the risks of problem and underage gambling minimised, and the levy TAB NZ pays at 0.74% of gross profit funds the harm-minimisation work.

For a punter on a budget, the deposit limit is the most useful tool. Set it before the first bet, not after the first losing streak. Time-outs are best used coolly, between fixtures, rather than mid-fixture when a loss feels urgent.

Where the offshore brands leave the punter

Offshore bookmakers are not required to honour New Zealand safer-gambling rules, and the regulator has warned that some sit in jurisdictions with minimal consumer safeguards. A punter who has self-excluded from TAB NZ and then opened an offshore account has not excluded themselves from anything on the offshore side; the offshore operator is not part of the same exclusion register. The national online-betting exclusion register the casino law will eventually require applies to online casinos, not to sports betting, and would not have caught a self-excluded sports punter migrating offshore in any case.

Help and where it is found

The free Gambling Helpline (0800 654 655), the text line (8006) and Safer Gambling Aotearoa are the points of contact for a punter whose session has stopped being a choice. They are free, they are confidential, and they are part of the New Zealand framework that no offshore bookmaker mirrors. The Problem Gambling Levy paid by TAB NZ helps fund that work; offshore bookmakers pay none of it. The asymmetry is part of the cost a New Zealand punter weighs when choosing which counter to use.

The reviewed operators, by verdict

TAB — the lawful counter for everything it offers

TAB is one of the two online brands of TAB New Zealand. The “New Zealand Racing Board” seller name on the App Store and the 8 September 2014 first-release date place it as the longer-standing of the two products. TAB carries the full New Zealand harm-minimisation framework: verified New Zealand address at account opening, deposit limits, time-outs and self-exclusion across both brands, and a 0.74% Problem Gambling Levy on its gross profit going to harm prevention.

For a New Zealand punter in 2026, TAB is the only lawful counter for racing and sport. It is also the only counter on which a disputed bet can be escalated through New Zealand’s regulator. The price inside the betslip holds whatever margin TAB’s pricing team sets; the framework around it is the New Zealand one. The close fits a punter who has decided the cost of staying inside the law matters more than the extra half-point of margin an offshore book might offer on a single fixture.

Betcha — the second skin of the same counter

Betcha is the second online brand of TAB NZ. The betcha app adds three product layers on top of the same back-end: a daily Toolbox with odds boosts and insurance tools for bets that do not land, a Bet Social section where punters chat, follow tipsters and share bets or pools, and a Playbook with tips and match analysis. None of that shifts the price; all of it shifts the surface area a punter interacts with.

For a New Zealand punter who likes the social texture of a sportsbook and wants the same-framework guarantees, Betcha is the same proposition as TAB in a different outfit. Choosing one over the other is a product choice, not a regulatory one.

Spinbara — a curated sports welcome, an offshore footprint

Spinbara advertises a first-deposit bonus of 100% up to EUR 100 on sports and a sport crypto welcome of 100% up to 200 USDT, alongside a casino welcome of 100% up to EUR 500 plus 200 free spins. None of that makes it lawful in New Zealand. The bonus sizes are aimed at European and crypto customers, not at NZD; the value of any offer depends on the currency the player actually uses.

For an overseas-curious punter who accepts that the offer is not lawful in New Zealand and that any dispute sits outside the New Zealand framework, Spinbara is one of several brands operating with that profile. The qualifying terms behind a 100%-up-to figure are the cost that is never printed on the welcome tile.

FunBet — broad sport menu, no New Zealand path

FunBet’s sportsbook prices football, ice hockey, American football, basketball, volleyball, tennis, rugby and baseball, with live betting and a bookmaker described as open 24/7. The breadth of the menu is the pitch; the absence of a New Zealand licence is the limit. A punter used to a TAB-sized menu will find more sports here than on the lawful counter; a punter who needs New Zealand harm-minimisation tools will find none of them.

FunBet offers broad coverage with the same no-NZ-framework caveat as the rest of the offshore set.

Alawin — cash out, no guarantees

Alawin’s published cash-out terms let a bettor lock in a win or loss before settlement, offer partial cash out, decline to guarantee the feature is available, and exclude free bets and risk-free bets from cash out. The feature is presented as flexibility; the terms present it as conditional. A punter who plans around “I can always cash out” is planning around a feature that may not exist on the leg they care about.

For a punter who values the cash-out mechanic and accepts the offshore-framework gap, Alawin is a serviceable choice. The reality-check on the published terms is the only premium.

Rooster.bet and RoyalistPlay — two skins, one operator

Both Rooster.bet and RoyalistPlay are owned and operated by Novatrix SRL, a Costa Rica company with registration number 3-102-893958, and both state that they hold e-gaming licence No. 0000002 from the Tobique Gaming Commission. The Tobique licence gives no right to take bets from people in New Zealand. Site differences include RoyalistPlay’s English – NZ locale at /en-NZ and six odds formats (European, British, Hong Kong, American, Indonesian, Malaysian); Rooster.bet shows six odds formats and a Live / Sports Promotions / Results / Schedule / E-sports / Predictions menu structure.

The choice between the two is a choice of surface — the same licence applies to whichever skin is used, and either choice sits one owner step away from a Tobique paper licence, not a New Zealand one.

Glorion — support, not licence

Glorion lists live chat and email support and accepts customers over 18 only. It does not name a licence that applies in New Zealand. For a punter who values reachable support, Glorion meets that bar; for a punter who values dispute escalation through a New Zealand regulator, it does not.

Glorion is a baseline entry — the support is real, the licence is not a New Zealand one.

RTbet — Curaçao paper, no local standing

RTbet’s published terms let the operator offer cash out before settlement, fix the cash-out amount at the moment accepted and decline to guarantee the feature is always available. The Curaçao licence it states gives no right to take bets from people in New Zealand. The cash-out terms are the product pitch; the absence of New Zealand standing is the deal.

For an offshore-curious punter, RTbet sits in the same no-NZ-framework category as the wider field, with cash-out terms that can be read against any settlement dispute.

BillyBets — coin-shop economy, no NZ status

BillyBets offers Decimal (2.00), American (+100) and Fractional (1/1) odds formats, sports cashback and reload, a coin shop where coins earned through depositing, betting, tournaments and challenges exchange for free bets and free spins, and a five-tier VIP programme. None of those features extend New Zealand’s harm-minimisation framework to the player.

For an offshore-curious punter who plays across formats and likes the gamified loop of a coin-shop economy, BillyBets is a fuller-featured choice. The cost of the coin shop is whatever the wagering terms on the free-bet redemption require.

Cost in numbers: the margin of an illustrative market

The plan asks for one worked calculation on this page. Inputs: an illustrative two-way market priced at decimal odds 1.90 and 1.90 — a clean example of the kind of price a punter sees on a virtual fixture or a real one, not a quoted price. The implied probability on each side is 1 ÷ 1.90, or about 52.63%. Across both sides of the market, the implied probabilities sum to about 105.26%, and the excess over 100% is the bookmaker’s margin.

The result on this example is a payout share of about 95.0% and a margin of about 5.0% — that is, for every $10 the bookmaker takes in across both sides, roughly $9.50 returns to winning punters and roughly $0.50 stays with the bookmaker on average. A cleaner presentation writes the result as a band rather than a single figure: a market priced around 1.90 / 1.90 sits in a roughly 5% band, where the lower edge corresponds to a market priced a touch higher than 1.90 and the upper edge corresponds to a market priced a touch lower.

The same shape moves with the price. A market at 1.85 / 1.85 carries about 8.1% margin in the price; a market at 1.95 / 1.95 carries about 2.6% margin in the price. A punter reading a “best odds” headline should read it as a margin trade, because that is what it is.

The conclusion here says only what the formula yields: a margin at this price is the slice of every dollar wagered that the bookmaker keeps on average over many bets. It is a statistical estimate, not a guaranteed outcome, and it promises no payout, no win and no return.

What a single bet pays back, in arithmetic

A worked payout for a $10 stake at 1.90 returns $19 — the $10 stake plus $9 of profit. For a three-leg multi at 1.90, 2.10 and 1.70, the combined price is roughly 6.78; a $10 stake returns $67.80. The arithmetic is the same on a virtual fixture as on a real one, because the price is the price and the stake is the stake.

The cost is not in the arithmetic of the win; it is in the arithmetic of the loss. A punter staking $10 per bet across 100 bets at a 5% margin expects to be down about $50 by the end of the run, before any bonus clearing or promotional returns. Margin is what makes betting the bookmaker’s business.

How operators stack up on the cost question

Where the menu narrows for a New Zealand punter

The narrowness is structural, not editorial. Only TAB and Betcha are lawful for a New Zealand punter, and they are one operator. The other eight brands in this set are reachable from a New Zealand IP address because the law does not block them — but the law targets the operator, and the regulator has issued the warnings described earlier in this page. A punter who treats offshore brands as fungible with TAB NZ is paying no attention to either the law or to who they will talk to if a bet refuses to settle.

Where a price comparison runs out of road

A “best odds” comparison for virtual sport in New Zealand does not have ten rows to compare. It has two rows that are the same row. The offshore brands are not a legitimate market for a New Zealand punter on a plain reading of section 74AAA, and the regulator’s standing warning is that they may not pay out large wins, may not return unspent credits, and may not sit inside any New Zealand dispute-resolution channel.

What that means for a punter keeping score

A punter keeping score — deposit in, withdrawable balance out — does best to keep score inside the same counter. Two TAB NZ skins cover the same product at the same price; an offshore bookmaker sitting outside the New Zealand framework changes the cost calculation by changing which rules apply, not by changing the price.

A short framing for the punter’s own decision

The single hardest fact on this page is the cheapest fact to repeat: in 2026, if a person in New Zealand wants to bet on a virtual football fixture, the lawful counter is the same counter that takes a real racing bet. There is no second lawful counter to shop against. That is the trade the law has made, and the cost is visible in two places — in the absence of price competition on the lawful counter, and in the elevated risk of the offshore alternative.

The cheapest path through the page is to read the law section first, the cost section second, and only then the operator by operator material. The order is deliberate: the law decides the counter; the cost decides the stake; the operator review fills in the texture for a punter who has decided to bet at all.

Frequently asked questions

What is a virtual sports bet, in plain terms?

A virtual sports bet is a fixed-odds wager on a computer-simulated match or race — virtual football, virtual horse racing, virtual greyhounds and similar — settled the moment the simulated event ends. The betslip behaves like any fixed-odds wager: stake multiplied by decimal odds, paid on settlement, void rules following the operator’s published terms. The outcome is a draw from a fixed random distribution, audited by an independent testing house, and is not predictable from past results in the way real sport sometimes is. New Zealand’s Online Casino Gambling Act 2026 classes betting on a simulated sporting event as online casino gambling rather than sports betting.

How does virtual football betting work in practice?

A virtual football fixture is generated by software on a schedule, often every few minutes. The punter selects a market — win, draw, loss, over/under, sometimes both-teams-to-score — and stakes at the published decimal odds. The simulated match plays out on screen, a result is recorded, and the bet is settled instantly at the fixed odds. Stake and odds multiply to the return; the same arithmetic that governs a real football bet. The same-game multi is available where the operator offers it, with legs drawn from one simulated fixture.

Can a bettor reliably predict virtual football outcomes?

No published method moves the long-run return above the published RTP of a virtual football market. Each outcome is an independent draw from a fixed distribution; analysis of past draws does not change the next one. What a punter can move is the cost per bet — by choosing markets with higher RTP, by sizing each wager against a session bank that survives a losing streak, and by reading the safer-gambling tools the New Zealand framework makes available on the TAB NZ apps. Anyone selling a “winning system” for virtual football is selling a fog.

Which bookmaker may lawfully take sports and racing bets in New Zealand?

Since 28 June 2025, under section 74AAA of the Racing Industry Act 2020, only TAB New Zealand may offer racing or sports betting to a person in New Zealand. TAB NZ runs two online brands — TAB and Betcha — and the duopoly is one operator, not two competing ones. There is no licence route for another bookmaker and no licence register for betting, because there is only this one lawful provider. Offshore bookmakers taking New Zealand customers are breaking New Zealand law on the operator side; no published penalty exists for the player, but the regulator warns of limited consumer safeguards, possible non-return of unspent credits and possible non-payment of large wins.

How is a bet’s return worked out from the stake and the odds?

A decimal-odds bet returns the stake multiplied by the odds: a $10 stake at 1.90 returns $19, which is $10 stake plus $9 profit. A multi multiplies the odds of each leg to a single combined price, and that price multiplied by the stake is the return: $10 at a combined price of 4.18 returns $41.80. The arithmetic is the same on virtual fixtures as on real ones, because the price is the price and the stake is the stake. The cost of the bet is in the margin the bookmaker holds across both sides of the market, not in the arithmetic of the win.

Content created by the «cryptobetsnz» team